4 ms·

How do you reconcile that view with Elon's successful ventures, e.g. the other Tesla's, Starlink, and SpaceX?

93po 4y ago
It's reconciled that these people have elon derangement syndrome and insist that they know his business better than he does despite never having done anything like it before in their lives
sharkjacobs 4y ago
I'm not OP but I think that they said that Elon sounds like a bad PM to work under, not that he's unsuccessful at developing and marketing products
- shepherdjerred 4y ago
  I replied to OP but the question was pointed to a broader audience. Many on HN have _very_ negative feelings for Elon. He's a pretty crazy guy, but I can think of few people/companies who are doing things that could have as big of an impact as Tesla, Starlink, and SpaceX. I understand how you could have doubts with Tesla, but that how could those feelings not dissolve when seeing those reusable boosters land on their own? How many other organizations could do such a thing?
- jstummbillig 4y ago
  Considering they used "shower thoughts" to devalue the idea before factoring in Elons incredible track record (by company/capitalist metrics, no personal judgement required), I feel that you are being very generous towards OP.
  - jevgeni 4y ago
    Don't confuse overheated valuations with business success.
    - shepherdjerred 4y ago
      Do you not consider SpaceX, Starlink, or Tesla to be successful? I don't mean profitable; I mean something that is pushing humanity forward? I know that Tesla has a lot of negative press due to autopilot (and rightly so), but they are still a leader in both self-driving and electric vehicles.
      - jevgeni 4y ago
        If these companies push humanity forward? Honestly, I'm a bit on the fence about that. Tesla was disruptive in a sense that it made car manufacturers massively accelerate their EV plans. But do I see any continued impact? Not really.
        shepherdjerred 4y ago
        I know that there are _plenty_ of other electric car manufacturers, and electric cars would eventually become popular, but Tesla making it happen _n_ years faster is an overwhelmingly good thing. There's also a lot of potential (depending on who you ask) for autopilot, although I think it was a mistake to switch from lidar to pure computer vision. Time will tell.
jevgeni 4y ago
Massive gov subsidies. https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-201...
- shepherdjerred 4y ago
  Are government subsidies bad? Why? Isn't Elon doing exactly what the government is intending which is to promote the development of technologies that are beneficial but not profitable/popular? Hasn't this approach been proven successful with the current push towards solar and electric cars? The article even says: > The payoff for the public would come in the form of major pollution reductions, but only if solar panels and electric cars break through as viable mass-market products. For now, both remain niche products for mostly well-heeled customers. Neither of these products are as niche today as they were in 2015 (when the article was written).
  - jevgeni 4y ago
    I'm not arguing against subsidies. But, claiming that SpaceX, Tesla, or Musk personally were uniquely competitive, successful, or disruptive while they had a buffer of 5bn USD in the back pocket is misleading.
    - shepherdjerred 4y ago
      Having a boatload of cash does not guarantee success. Elon positioned himself well to compete in areas that would receive those subsidies, and then used that money to create rocketships and electric cars. I'm sure you can find _plenty_ of examples of people spending billions less effectively, e.g. the city of Boston spending $22 billion on a tunnel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig I'm not saying he's a genius or unprecedented, just that he is successful, and that his success was not guaranteed.

93po 4y ago

It's reconciled that these people have elon derangement syndrome and insist that they know his business better than he does despite never having done anything like it before in their lives

sharkjacobs 4y ago

I'm not OP but I think that they said that Elon sounds like a bad PM to work under, not that he's unsuccessful at developing and marketing products

shepherdjerred 4y ago
I replied to OP but the question was pointed to a broader audience. Many on HN have _very_ negative feelings for Elon. He's a pretty crazy guy, but I can think of few people/companies who are doing things that could have as big of an impact as Tesla, Starlink, and SpaceX. I understand how you could have doubts with Tesla, but that how could those feelings not dissolve when seeing those reusable boosters land on their own? How many other organizations could do such a thing?
jstummbillig 4y ago
Considering they used "shower thoughts" to devalue the idea before factoring in Elons incredible track record (by company/capitalist metrics, no personal judgement required), I feel that you are being very generous towards OP.
- jevgeni 4y ago
  Don't confuse overheated valuations with business success.
  - shepherdjerred 4y ago
    Do you not consider SpaceX, Starlink, or Tesla to be successful? I don't mean profitable; I mean something that is pushing humanity forward? I know that Tesla has a lot of negative press due to autopilot (and rightly so), but they are still a leader in both self-driving and electric vehicles.
    - jevgeni 4y ago
      If these companies push humanity forward? Honestly, I'm a bit on the fence about that. Tesla was disruptive in a sense that it made car manufacturers massively accelerate their EV plans. But do I see any continued impact? Not really.
      - shepherdjerred 4y ago
        I know that there are _plenty_ of other electric car manufacturers, and electric cars would eventually become popular, but Tesla making it happen _n_ years faster is an overwhelmingly good thing. There's also a lot of potential (depending on who you ask) for autopilot, although I think it was a mistake to switch from lidar to pure computer vision. Time will tell.

jevgeni 4y ago

Massive gov subsidies. https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-20150531-story.html https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-hy-musk-subsidies-201...

shepherdjerred 4y ago
Are government subsidies bad? Why? Isn't Elon doing exactly what the government is intending which is to promote the development of technologies that are beneficial but not profitable/popular? Hasn't this approach been proven successful with the current push towards solar and electric cars? The article even says: > The payoff for the public would come in the form of major pollution reductions, but only if solar panels and electric cars break through as viable mass-market products. For now, both remain niche products for mostly well-heeled customers. Neither of these products are as niche today as they were in 2015 (when the article was written).
- jevgeni 4y ago
  I'm not arguing against subsidies. But, claiming that SpaceX, Tesla, or Musk personally were uniquely competitive, successful, or disruptive while they had a buffer of 5bn USD in the back pocket is misleading.
  - shepherdjerred 4y ago
    Having a boatload of cash does not guarantee success. Elon positioned himself well to compete in areas that would receive those subsidies, and then used that money to create rocketships and electric cars. I'm sure you can find _plenty_ of examples of people spending billions less effectively, e.g. the city of Boston spending $22 billion on a tunnel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Dig I'm not saying he's a genius or unprecedented, just that he is successful, and that his success was not guaranteed.